Abhishek Thesis m.tech

College of Engineering, Pune Department of Civil
Engineering
A PROJECT DISSERTATION REPORT

on
“Parametric Study for Designing Preliminary Lining Thickness
Of Single Tunnel And Investigation Of Spacing Between Twin
Tunnel”
Submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirement of

the degree of
MASTER OF TECHNOLOGY
in
CIVIL ENGINEERING- GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING
by
AKSHAY R. MEHARE
MIS No. 122021018
Under the Guidance of
Dr.S.M.Nawghare.
Assistant professor
Department of Civil Engineering, COEP, Pune
Department of Civil Engineering

COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING PUNE i
Pune- 411005
College of Engineering, Pune Department of Civil
Engineering
(2021-2022)
Department of Civil Engineering,

COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING PUNE -5
(An Autonomous Institute of Government of Maharashtra)
CERTIFICATE
This is to certify that the dissertation entitled ‘Parametric Study for Designing
Preliminary Lining Thickness Of Single Tunnel And Investigation Of Spacing
Between Twin Tunnel’ submitted by MR.AKSHAY R. MEHARE (MIS No.
122021018), in the partial fulfilment of the requirement for the award of degree
Master of Technology (Civil Engineering) with specialization in Geotechnical
Engineering of College of Engineering Pune, affiliated to the Savitribai Phule Pune
University, is a record of His own work.
Dr.S.M.NAWGHARE Dr. B. M. DAWARI

Guide Head of the Department
Department of Civil Engineering Department of Civil Engineering
College of Engineering Pune. College of Engineering Pune.
Date : ../…/2022
Place: PUNE ii
College of Engineering, Pune Department of Civil Engineering
Examination Approval Sheet

The Dissertation Report entitled
“Parametric Study for Designing Preliminary Lining Thickness Of single tunnel

And Investigation of Spacing between Twin Tunnel”
By
AKSHAY RAMESHRAO MEHARE
MIS. 122021018
Is approved for the degree of M-Tech Civil (Geotechnical Engineering)
Of
COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING, PUNE
(AN AUTONOMOUS INSTITUTE OF GOVT. OF MAHARASHTRA)
Shivajinagar, Pune - 411005
Examiners Name Signature
1. External Examiner ………………………………………… ………………….
2. Internal Examiner ………………………………………… ………………….
3. Supervisor (s) ………………………………………… …………………..
Date: .../…/2022
Place: PUNE
ii
i
DECLARATION
I declare that, this written submission represents my ideas in my own words and where others’ ideas or
words have been included. I have adequately cited and referenced the original sources. I also declare that; I
have adhered to all the principals of academic honesty and integrity and have not misrepresented or
fabricated or falsified any idea/data/fact/source in my submission. I understand that any violation of the
above will be cause for disciplinary action by the Institute and can also evoke penal action from the sources
which have thus not been properly cited or from whom proper permission has not been taken when needed.
AKSHAY RAMESHRAO MEHARE
(MIS No. 122021018)
Date: / / 2022
Place: PUNE
iv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I wish to express my most sincere gratitude to my proficient guide Prof. Dr.S.M Nawghare, Civil
Engineering Department, College of Engineering, Pune for appreciating the idea of this subject in my
mind and for being a constant source of inspiration to me. His keen interest, constant encouragement
and timely guidance have enriched my project work. His experience, knowledge and positive attitude
made possible the culmination of this work. His unconditional support made the path easier and
enjoyable.
I would like to express my deepest thanks to the head of the department prof. Dr. B M Dawari for his
kind support.
I would also like to thank Prof. Dr. S.S. Bhosale, Prof. Dr. Y.A. Kolekar, Prof. Dr. K.K. Tripathi and Dr
R. S. Dalvi for their kind co-operation and support.
I would like to thank to HR, MAHA Metro and TPL entire staff that helped us to undertake the site visit
at Pune Metro Rail Project. Last but not least, we would like to express our gratitude to our friends and
respondents for the support and willingness.
Lastly, I am very grateful to all the professors, staff of civil engineering department and those persons
who directly and indirectly helped me during my project work.
AKSHAY R. MEHARE
MIS No. 122021018
Date: / / 2022
Place: PUNE
v
CONTENTS
ABSTRACT vii
LIST OF FIGURES viii
LIST OF TABLES ix
CHAPTER 1 1
INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 General 1
1.2 Need 2
1.3 Aim and Objectives 2
CHAPTER 2 3
LITERATURE REVIEW 3
2.1 General 3
CHAPTER 3 5
METHODOLOGY AND ANALYSIS 5
3.1 Research methodology 5
3.2 Data Collection 5
3.3 Data Analysis 7
3.3.1 Parametric study for the face stability of 6.1 diameter tunnel in limestone and
sandstone: 7
3.3.2 Effect of Heterogeneity 9
3.3.3 Effect of water table 10
3.3.4 Effect of preliminary lining thickness on face stability of tunnel. 12
3.3.5 For twin tunnel
CHAPTER 4 13
OBSERVATIONS 13
Case 1: Effect of rock property on vertical displacements of the invert. 14
Case 2: Effect of rock property on vertical displacements of the crown. 15
Case 3: Effect of rock property on solid stresses at the crown and the invert. 16
Case 4: Effect of tunnel diameter on vertical displacements of the invert. 17
Case 5: Effect of tunnel diameter on vertical displacements of the crown. 18
Case 6: Effect of tunnel diameter on stresses at the crown and the invert. 19
Case 7: Effect of heterogeneity on displacements of Crown and Invert. 20
Case 8: Effect of heterogeneity on Stresses on Crown and Invert. 21
Case 9: Effect of Water Depth on Displacements on Crown and Invert. 22
Case 10: Effect of Water Depth on Stresses on Crown and Invert. 23
Case 11: Effect of Lining Thickness on Displacements of the Crown and Invert of 6.1 Diameter
Tunnel. 24
vi
Case 12: Effect of Lining Thickness on Stresses of the Crown and Invert of 6.1
Diameter Tunnel. 25
For Twin Tunnel 26
26
27
CHAPTER 5 28
Case Study: Pune Metro Underground (Civil Court to Swargate) 28
5.1 Introduction to Pune Metro 28
5.2 Need For Metro 29
5.3 Tunnel Boring Machine (TBM) 34
5.4 Precast Segments (Rings) 35
5.5 Methodology 37
5.6 Observations 37
CHAPTER 6 38
CONCLUSION 38
REFERENCES 39
vii
ABSTRACT
Increasing population and urbanization leads to traffic and space congestion issues. To ease out this
complication, the scope of construction of tunnel infrastructure has risen from the last decade in urban areas.
Recent advancement in tunneling using Tunnel Boring Machine (TBM) has proved to be more beneficial in
working under complex and challenging geological conditions. While being safe and faster it provides a
cost-effective solution for urban development. Besides these advantages, tunnel construction work has a
severe impact on structures above and around the tunnel alignment. Therefore, the study of the ground-
induced settlement of tunnels through various geological conditions and diameters has been an emerging
topic for researchers. Previous research had concluded that tunnel diameter, critical depth to diameter (C/D)
ratio, and ground strata have a critical impact on the face stability of the tunnel. This research work focuses
on the face stability of tunnels in different sets of geological and geometrical parameters. Three-dimensional
(3-D) finite element analysis method using Midas Gtx-Nx was proposed in this work. Hoek and Brown
failure criteria were applied while modelling. The parametric study had been done on the crown and on the
invert to observe their displacement and stresses. This study concludes that tunnel diameter and geological
parameters had a critical impact on tunnel face stability and distance between twin tunnel is investigated.
Proper investigation of these parameters is essential in the pre-planning phase of tunnel construction to prove
its benefits for society.
KEYWORD:- Tunnel Boring Machine (TBM), Critical Depth To Diameter (C/D) ratio, Twin Tunnel,
viii
LIST OF FIGURES
Fig. 3.1 Modelling....................................................................................................................8
Fig 3.2 3-D Meshing for analysis.............................................................................................8
Fig. 3.3 Application of pressure...............................................................................................8
Fig. 3.4 Boundary constraints..................................................................................................8
Fig.3.5 Heterogeneity cases with change in soil depth...........................................................10
Fig 3.6 various cases of water depth......................................................................................11
Fig 3.7 Variation in lining thickness.......................................................................................12
Fig 3.8 Model in Midas GTX-Nx...........................................................................................12
Fig 4.1 Maximum vertical displacement of invert..................................................................14
Fig 4.2 Maximum vertical displacement of rown...................................................................15
Fig 4.3 Maximum stresses with change in rock property.......................................................16
Fig. 4.4 Maximum vertical displacement of invert.................................................................17
Fig. 4.5 Maximum vertical displacement of crown................................................................18
Fig. 4.6 Maximum stresses with change in tunnel diameter.................................................19
Fig. 4.7 Maximum vertical displacement of crown and invert with change in soil depth.....20
Fig. 4.8 Maximum stresses with change in soil depth............................................................21
Fig. 4.9 Maximum displacements with change in water depth..............................................22
Fig. 4.10 Effect of water depth on stresses............................................................................23
Fig. 4.11 Effect of lining thickness on displacement of 6.1m diameter tunnel.....................24
Fig 4.12 Effect of lining thickness on stresses of 6.1m diameter tunnel..............................25
Fig 4.13 Effect of lining thickness on displacement of 6.1m diameter tunnel......................26
Fig 5.1 Pune Metro route map...............................................................................................28
Fig 5.2 Visit to Vanaz depot..................................................................................................29
Fig 5.3 Tunnel boring machine..............................................................................................30
Fig 5.4 Single shield TBM.....................................................................................................31
Fig 5.5 Double shield TBM...................................................................................................32
Fig 5.6 Cutterhead.................................................................................................................32
Fig 5.7 Gripper......................................................................................................................33
Fig 5.8 Conveyor...................................................................................................................33
Fig 5.9 Field Visit to Civil Court...........................................................................................34
Fig 5.10 Precast segments......................................................................................................35
Fig 5.11 Lining.......................................................................................................................36
ix
LIST OF TABLES
Table 3.1: Pressure parameters...................................................................................................6
Table 3.2: Geotechnical Parameters...........................................................................................6
Table 3.3: Geotechnical Parameters for Highly Weathered Basalt............................................7
Table 4.1: Displacements of the invert in Limestone and Sandstone......................................14
Table 4.2: Displacement of the crown in limestone and Sandstone.........................................15
Table 4.3: Maximum Stresses on the crown and the invert for given rock property.....……..15
Table 4.4: Displacements of the invert in 6.1m diameter tunnel.............................................16
Table 4.5: Displacements of the crown in 6.1m diameter tunnel.............................................17
Table 4.6: Maximum Stresses on the crown and the invert depending upon tunnel
diameter....................................................................................................................................18
Table 4.7: Maximum displacements of crown and invert depending upon varying depth of
soil............................................................................................................................................19
Table 4.8 Maximum stresses on crown and invert depending upon varying depth of soil…..20
Table 4.9 Maximum displacements on crown and Invert depending upon varying depth of
Water........................................................................................................................................21
Table 4.10: Maximum Stresses on crown and invert depending upon varying depth of Water
Table 4.11: Maximum displacements on crown and invert depending upon varying thickness
of lining....................................................................................................................................22
Table 4.12: Maximum stresses on crown and invert depending upon varying thickness of
lining........................................................................................................................................23
Table 4.13: Maximum displacements on crown and invert depending upon varying thickness
of lining...................................................................................................................................24
Table 4.14: Maximum stresses on crown and invert depending upon varying thickness of
lining.......................................................................................................................................25
x
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1. General
Developing countries have to cope up with the increasing population and its growing demand
for open land and transport facilities. To provide an efficient transport system, there is a need
to utilize underground space productively. Usage of tunnels for transportation can help us to
reduce traffic congestion at city centers and efficiently engage underground land while saving
both time and fuel. Tunnel infrastructures have been constructed for a long time using
conventional methods like cut and cover or drill and blast. The method of tunnel construction
is governed by several factors which include site geology, groundwater conditions,
construction cost, and probable surface disruption. In recent times modern technologies,
international standards, codes, hi-tech equipment in tunnel construction are being adopted
and proved to be beneficial.
Advanced techniques of tunneling include tunneling of the single bore and twin-bore tunnels
by Tunnel Boring Machine (TBM) which results in faster, safer, and cost-effective
construction. Geologically challenging and special projects are now possible because of the
New Austrian Tunneling Method (NATM) and mechanized techniques like TBM. The basic
advantage of using TBM for tunnel construction is that they are highly safe with low over
breaks, little disturbance to surrounding rock mass and low man power.
Tunneling requires analysis of face stability and the factors by which it is affected.
Numerical methods for tunnel analysis constitute a very valuable supplement in tunnel face
stability analysis. Various analytical methods used for tunnel analysis and design have
evolved since last decade such as finite element analysis, discrete analysis, stiffness matrix
method, finite differential method, etc. Previous studies have emphasized that the tunnel
diameter, critical depth to diameter (C/D) ratio, and geological strata govern the stability of
the tunnel. An accurate estimation of ground-induced settlements, horizontal ground
movements and pressures on tunnel lining are required for the economic design of tunnels.
Three-dimensional (3-D) finite element analysis method using Midas GTx-Nx was proposed
in this work. Hoek and Brown failure criteria were applied while TBM driven tunnel
modelling. A parametric study had been done at the crown and the invert of the tunnel and
conclusions were drawn for optimized C/D ratio. This research work concludes that proper
investigation of
1
geological and hydrological parameters in the pre-planning phase of construction offers cost-
effective tunnel construction work.
1.1 Need
The tunnel construction work for infrastructure development in metropolitan cities provides a
feasible and cost-effective solution. The geological, geotechnical and hydrological
investigation program is required to be adequately accomplished in order to provide realistic
information for economic and safe design and construction of underground infrastructure.
These are the most important aspects which affect the tunnel stability and their study and
analysis is useful from practical point of view. This research demonstrates the effect of the
tunnel size and ground strength parameter on the face stability of tunnels. It also aims at
studying the effect of heterogeneity, water table and preliminary lining thickness on face
stability (of 6.1m tunnel) which can help to improve practical situations that arise during
construction.
1.2 Aim and Objectives
Aim
To perform parametric study for face stability of the tunnel and investigate the distance between
Twin Tunnel :Towards analysis and design of underground infrastructure projects using Midas
Gtx-Nx software
Objectives
1. To study various parameters related to tunnel excavation.

2. To study various construction stages involved in tunnel construction work.
3. To analyze ground behavior and stresses on tunnel parameters.
4. To conclude C/D ratio for face stability.
5. To observe the effect of overburden on tunnel stability.
6. To investigate the effect of heterogeneity on the face stability.
7. To observe the effect of water level on the tunnel stability.
8. To observe the effect of lining thickness on tunnel stability.
9. To suggest preliminary lining thickness design for given tunnel.
10. To investigate the distance between twin tunnel
2
CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 General
According to Anagnostou G. and Kovari K. [1] the geotechnical and operational aspects will
affect the tunnel face stability. Also, the mechanism of face failure is analysed under drained
conditions. Under extremely unfavourable geological and hydrogeological conditions, however,
face instabilities may occur. In this paper, the mechanism of face failure is analysed under drained
conditions. Accordingly, a distinction is made between water-pressure and effective pressure in
the chamber. The stability of the tunnel face is controlled through the combined effects of these
two entities.
W.Q. Ding, et al. [2] concluded that through the FEM analysis, numerical procedures can make
adequate predictions on the mechanical behaviour of complex soil–structure interaction system
such as shield tunnelling during and after construction. The Author also added that such numerical
predictions can enhance the design and construction measures of geotechnical works in soft soils.
He compared numerical results and actual results from the field and concluded that the numerical
procedure can be used to effectively estimate the deformation, stresses and moments experienced
by the surrounding soil and the concrete lining segments.
Guilhem Mollon suggested that the significance of face stability is related to the C/D ratio and
anticipation of ground deformation is important to prevent face collapse of the tunnel. The author
also suggested the minimum value of critical face pressure leads to the verge of collapse of soil in
front of the tunnel face. He also concluded that failure probability is more sensitive to friction
angle than to cohesion of the soil in reliable probabilistic results. The collapse reliability index
increases with increase of the tunnel face pressure. He also concluded that failure probability is
more sensitive to friction angle than to cohesion of the soil in reliable probabilistic results. The
collapse reliability index increases with increase of the tunnel face pressure.
Peng Zeng This emphasizes the importance of an adequate characterization of geotechnical
uncertainties for practical applications. This also confirms that the reliability of tunnel face
stability increases significantly as the face support increases or the tunnel diameter decreases.
3
Shilpa Kulkarni [9] analysed the face stability of mega tunnels by analysing the effect of various
pressures such as earth pressure, jack thrust, skin friction between ground strata and TBM. Also
the effect of pore pressure and tunnel lining thickness on tunnel face stability. The author
concluded that the requirement of preliminary lining thickness in mega tunnels depends upon the
C/D ratio. The required preliminary lining thickness is directly proportional to the given C/D
ratio, in soft soil and Earth pressure is a critical parameter to affect face stability of the tunnel,
investigation of which at various C/D ratios is important.
Shilpa Kulkarni [10] suggested the water pressure had critically impacted face stability beyond
two times of tunnel diameter. Adequate application of pressures can stabilize the tunnel at
optimum critical depth. The authors also concluded that the three - dimensional finite element
method is an effective tool to investigate tunnel face stability and Midas Gtx-Nx proved its
effectiveness for it. Michael J. Kawadas [11] claimed that adequate control of ground pressures
ensures a safe and economical structure, well adapted to the inherent heterogeneity of ground
conditions. He also concluded that in shallow tunnels the objective of monitoring the deformation
is to limit the ground displacements to values sufficiently low to prevent damage to structures and
utilities.
4
CHAPTER 3
METHODOLOGY AND ANALYSIS

3.1 Research methodology
Firstly to start with the work, all the relevant literature from various sources was collected and
sorted according to the need. Various books and reference papers were studied and information
was obtained. All the acquired information was thoroughly studied. Appropriate geotechnical
and pressure parameters were considered. The software used for the modelling was Midas Gtx-
Nx. The software and the procedure to create models in it were carefully studied. Models were
prepared and results were compared as well as validated. Conclusions were drawn on the basis
of observed results.
NO
YES
3.1 Data Collection
For tunnel modelling, different pressure and geotechnical parameters were referred from Shilpa
Kulkarni [11] are shown in Table 3.1 and Table 3.2. Other data for soft computing were referred
from authentic sources and research papers.
5
Table 3.1 Pressure parameters
Sr no. Type of pressure Pressure (kN/m2)
1. Drilling/Horizontal/Face Pressure 200
2. Jack thrust -4500
3. Pressure due to contraction over the body of the shield 50

TBM
4. Pressure due to gap between shield TBM and 1000

the segment diameter
The negative sign indicates that the pressure is applied in the opposite direction with respect to face
pressure.
Table 3.2 Geotechnical parameters
Sr.no Design Rock Rock RCC Steel

parametr (Sandstoe) Segment Grout
(Limeston)
Modulus of 30 e^6 19.9 e^6 2.1e^7 2.5e^8 1e^7

1 elasticity
(E) (MPa)
Poisson's ratio 0.25 0.3 0.3 0.2
2 -
Unit weight 27 27 24 78
3 (kN/m3) 22.5
Cohesion 30 40 - -
4 (MPa) -
Frictionangle 50 35 - -
5 (˚) -
Earth pressure 1 1 1 -
6 coefficient at -
rest(K0)
6
Table 3.3 Geotechnical parameters for Highly Weathered Basalt
Sr Design parameter Rock (Basalt)

no.
1 Modulus of elasticity (E) (MPa) 1.2 e^6
2 Poisson's ratio 0.3
3 Unit weight (kN/m3) 20
4 Cohesion (MPa) 14
5 Friction angle (˚) 64
6 Earth pressure coefficient at rest 1

(K0)
3.3 Data Analysis
3.3.1 Parametric study for the face stability of 6.1m diameter tunnel in limestone and
sandstone:
For parametric study for the face stability of 6.1m diameter tunnels in limestone and sandstone,
three cases were considered. For the three cases, rock property was changed keeping the diameter
of the tunnel constant. Different sets of geotechnical and geometrical parameters were taken for
analysis.
Set 1) Diameter of 6.1 m with continuum as limestone.
Set 2) Diameter of 6.1 m with continuum as sandstone.
For analysis, three-dimensional models were prepared by varying the cover depth from C=1.5D to
C=3.5D in the intervals of 0.5D. The continuum is considered upto 3.5D. Geotechnical data and
pressure parameters for limestone and sandstone were referred from the tables given in data
collection (Table 3.1 , Table 3.2 and Table 3.3). The finite element method of analysis was used
for parametric study and the displacements of crown and invert were observed using the software.
Fig
3.1 and Fig 3.2 depicts modelling and meshing performed for analysis. Hoek and Brown failure
criteria was adopted. The validated pressures were applied while modelling as shown in Fig.3.3.
Self-weight was considered. Auto constraint for boundary conditions was applied and construction
7
stages were given as depicted in Fig.3.4. Set 1 and Set 2 were compared on the basis of change in
property (Limestone and Sandstone) while keeping the diameter constant 6.1m. The variation in
displacement and stresses were observed. The variation in displacement and stresses were
observed. The vertical displacements of the crown and the invert for various cover depths were
observed. Shilpa Kulkarni [10] concluded, the right and the left vertical sidewalls have negligible
displacements as compared to the crown and the invert at a given pressure, hence it was neglected
for observation. Further, comparisons were made concerning vertical displacement and stresses
developed on key points for various rock properties using graphical representation. It was
concluded that both 6.1m diameter tunnels were stable at 2D as cover depth. Hence for further
analysis, 2D was kept as a constant cover depth.
Fig 3.1. Modelling Fig 3.2. 3D Meshing for Analysis
Fig 3.3. Application of Pressure Fig 3.4. Boundary Constraint
8
3.3.2 Effect of Heterogeneity:

As concluded from previous results, the tunnel was found to be stable for a cover depth of 2D. For
heterogeneity, two different strata i.e. soil and rock (Limestone) were taken into account. The
tunnel was considered to be constructed in the rock strata and the soil depth above the rock was
varied. Four cases were studied by varying the soil depth. The displacements and stresses at crown
and invert were observed for each case.
Conclusions were drawn about the effect of heterogeneity on the tunnel face from the observations.
0.5D
6D
1D
5.5D
9
1.5D
5D
2D
4.5D
Fig 3.5 Heterogeneity Cases with change in soil depth
3.3.3 Effect of water table :
The cover depth was kept constant at 2D. In case of presence of water table, the water was
considered to be present below the ground level as underground water (saturated condition)
as well as above the ground level as surface water (submerged condition). Four cases were
studied. Two cases were considered by changing the water depth below the ground level,
while the rest of the two cases were considered by changing the water depth above the
ground level. Models were prepared in the similar way adopted in earlier cases. The
displacements and stresses at crown and invert were observed for each case. Conclusions
were drawn about the effect of the water table on the tunnel from the observations.
10
5m (below ground level)
38.2m
10m (below ground level)
33.2m
5/10m (above ground)
43.2m
Fig 3.6 Various cases of water depth
11
3.3.4 Effect of preliminary lining thickness on face stability of tunnel.
The cover depth was kept constant at 2D. The diameters 6.1 were considered for analysis. Four
cases were considered by changing the lining thickness as 200mm, 300mm, 400mm, 450mm.
Again, the graphs were plotted for displacements at crown and invert and suitable lining thickness
was suggested from the observations. Conclusions were drawn about the face stability of the
tunnel from the observations.
Fig 3.7. Variation in Lining Thickness
Fig 3.8. Model in Midas-GTX-NX
12
For Twin Tunnel
In metropolitan areas, the enhanced request of mass transit and the shortage of horizontal space bring
about an increased necessity for subway transport system Despite the fact that conventional analyses
are easy to utilize and provide well results, they are restricted due to presence of different solution
methods: stresses are usually obtained by elastic solution, movements are determined by using
empirical methods. Therefore, finite element method (FEM) is preferred to handle complicated issues
such as; modeling the complicated ground conditions, excavation orders, actual behavior of soil
material, complicated hydrogeological environments ,interaction between multiple tunnels,
considering short and long term conditions, soil structure interaction (David and Zdravkovic, 2001).
Nowadays, considering the sudden increase in development of computational tools and capability of
solving the complicated issues, the finite element methods are widely used. Several restrictions of the
analytical and empirical methods can be
Eliminated by the finite element method. In addition to geotechnical properties of material, depth, the
stress-strain condition and geometry of the tunnel structure can influence the ground deformation
depending on the excavation procedure. Finite element method can consider this excavation procedure
called ‘step-by-step’ method (Katzenbach and Breth, 1981; Galli et al., 2004; Yang et al., 2015;
Panthee et al., 2016; Zhang et al., 2016).
3.3.5 Finite Element Method

This study is focused on introducing a detailed procedure for obtaining modification factor based on
pre-support technique and rock mass quality, which are used in an existing equation as a modification
factor for calculating maximum surface settlement above openings of the twin tunnel structure. The
finite element analyses were performed by using the software Midas Gtx-Nx geotechnical finite
element package. This chapter is devoted to introduce the details of the finite element modeling,
constitutive models and construction procedures used in the performed parametric study. Despite the
improvements in hardware and software, 3D modelling of tunnels is still a time-consuming task
because it involves incremental phases to simulate the excavation and, most often, incorporates
material non-linearity (Trinh et al., 2010; Mazek and Almannaei, 2013; Shabna and Sankar, 2016;
Vitali et al., 2017; Kilany et al., 2017). Calculation processes of modelling using FEM generally
includes basic steps: determining model geometry, determination of material parameters, meshing, and
delineation of boundary, external and initial loading circumstances (Boeraeve, 2010). Tunnel opening
is modeled by removing the elements inside a tunnel limit. Excavation orders (top heading, bench and
invert) are applied in the plane-strain
model. The tunnel support structure comprises of; pre-support (forepole and umbrellaarch), the outer
lining (shotcrete) and the inner lining (final shotcrete for esthetic purposes). Jaeger (1979) pointed out
that tunnels are extremely stressed in all directions, the vertical constituent of stress proportional to
overburden weight over the tunnel and there is also a horizontal constituent of this stress. The in-situ
horizontal stress components are greater than the vertical ones at the mountain range. The vertical
stress can be computed by multiplying relevant depth with unit weight of overburden rock (Equation
4.2). Nonetheless, Sheorey (1994) formulate the earth stress model to recognize the mechanism of
horizontal stress at near-surface and deep levels.
13
Fig. 3.9 Geometry of tunnel.
Fig 3.10:- Meshing of twin tunnel
14
CHAPTER 4
OBSERVATIONS
Based on the above problem statement fourteen cases were considered which are cited below. For
the first case rock property was changed keeping the diameter of the tunnel as 6.1m. Displacement
and stress values at the crown and the invert for all cases were observed and optimum cover depth
to diameter was obtained. Taking into account the optimum cover depth further case of
heterogeneity was performed varying the soil depth above. Also a case showing effect of water
table on displacements and stresses on crown and invert were analysed. Finally the effect of
change in tunnel lining thickness in 6.1 m diameter tunnel was observed and optimum lining
thickness was concluded by consider same lining thickness distance between twin tunnel was
investigated for twin tunnel stability. A total of twenty two models were performed in MIDAS-
GTX-NX to draw the conclusions Further, the comparisons were made concerning vertical
displacement and stresses developed on key points for various cases through graphical
representation. Conclusions were drawn about the face stability of the tunnel from the observations
as given below.
15
Case 1: Effect of rock property on vertical displacements of the invert.

Table 4.1 Displacements of the invert in limestone and sandstone.
C/D Displacement of invert in Displacement of invert in sandstone

limestone (mm) (mm)
1.5 1.22 1.2

2 0.15 0.15
3 1.18 1.34
3.5 0.6 0.54
There were no significant changes observed in the invert displacements when the rock properties
were changed from limestone to sandstone. Maximum displacements for both were observed at
C/D Ratio = 3. Positive values of displacements refer to the settlement of the invert.
Maximu m V ertical D isp lacemen ts of In vert

1.6
1.4
1.2
Displacement (mm)
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4
C/d ratio
Displacement of invert in limestone (mm) Displacement of invert in sandstone (mm)
Fig 4.1. Maximum Vertical Displacements of Invert
16
Case 2: Effect of rock property on vertical displacements of the crown.
Table 4.2 Displacement of the crown in limestone and sandstone.
C/D Displacements of crown in Displacements of crown in

limestone (mm) sandstone (mm)
1.5 -1.93 -1.45
2 -1.33 -1.96
3 -2.37 -2.27
3.5 -2.37 -1.69
For the crown, significant changes in maximum vertical displacements were observed when rock
properties were changed. Negative values of displacements indicate the upheaval of the crown. For
.both maximum displacements were observed at C/D = 3.
Maximu m V ertical D isp lacemen ts of C row n
Displacement(mm)
0
1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4
-0.5
-1
C/d ratio
-1.5
-2
-2.5
Displacements of crown in limestone (mm) Displacements of crown in sandstone (mm)
Fig 4.2. Maximum Vertical Displacements of Crown
17
Case 3: Effect of rock property on solid stresses at the crown and the invert.
Table 4.3 Maximum Stresses on the crown and the invert for given Rock Property.
C/D Stresses on crown Stresses on invert Stresses on crown Stresses on invert

(limestone) (mm) (limestone) (mm) (sandstone) (mm) (sandstone) (mm)
1.5 -1240 -2166 -33433.33 -4500.5
2 -1102.31 -990.66 -1710.83 -5383.75
2.5 -2321.87 -2542.88 -2143.11 -5298.01
3 -2882.97 -1856.83 -1631.4 -4492.74
When rock properties were changed from limestone to sandstone stresses on the crown showed
significant difference at C=1.5D. Negative values of the stresses depict those stresses as
compressive.
Maximu m S tresses vs c/d ratio
0
1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4
-5000
-10000
Maximum Stress kn/m2
-15000
-20000
-25000
-30000
-35000
-40000
C/D ratio
stress crown limestone
Invert Stress Limestone
Fig 4.3. Maximum Stresses with change in rock property
18
Case 5: Effect of tunnel diameter on vertical displacements of the crown.

Table 4.5 Displacements of the crown in 6.1 m diameter tunnel.
C/D Displacements in 6.1 m diameter tunnel
1.5 -1.93
2 -1.33
3 -2.37
3.5 -2.37
The displacements of the crown for 6.1 m diameter tunnel were nearly equal Between
C = 3D and C = 3.5D.
Maximun vertical displacements of crown

0
1.5 2 3 3.5
-0.5
Maximum displacement(mm)
-1
-1.5
-2
-2.5
C/d ratio
Displacements in 6.1 m diameter tunnel
Fig 4.5. Maximum Vertical Displacements of Crown
19
Case 6: Effect of tunnel diameter on stresses at the crown and the invert.
Table 4.6 Maximum Stresses on the crown and the invert depending upon Tunnel diameter.
C/D Stresses on crown (6.1m dia) Stresses on invert (6.1m dia)
1.5 -1240 -2166
2 -1102.31 -990.66
3 -2321.87 -2542.88
3.5 -2882.97 -1856.83
When the diameter was changed the invert as well as crown showed maximum stresses at C=1.5D,
otherwise, at all other points, the stresses were nearly equal.
Maximu m stresses on crow n an d in vert

0
1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4
-500
-1000
Maximum stress kn/m2
-1500
-2000
-2500
-3000
-3500
C/d ratio
Stresses on crown (6.1m dia) Stresses on invert (6.1m dia)
Fig. 4.6 Maximum stresses on crown and invert.
20
Case 7: Effect of heterogeneity on displacements of Crown and Invert.
Table 4.7 Maximum displacements of Crown and Invert depending upon varying depth of soil.
C/D Displacements of Crown(mm) Displacements of Invert(mm)
0.5 -0.052 -1.938

1 -0.00032 0.000197
1.5 -0.3489 1.4616
2 -0.0498 0.1415
Displacement of the crown was seen to be insignificant due to heterogeneity. Invert displacements
varied significantly when soil depth was varied. Maximum displacement was seen at soil depth of
0.5D.
Maximu m d isp lacemen t vs soil d ep th

2
1.5
1
Maximum displacement(mm)
0.5
0
0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 2.2
-0.5
-1
-1.5
-2
-2.5
Depth of soil/d ratio

Displacements of Crown(mm) Displacements of Invert(mm)
Fig 4.7. Maximum vertical displacements of crown and invert with change in soil depth
21
Case 8: Effect of heterogeneity on Stresses on Crown and Invert.
Table 4.8 Maximum stresses on Crown and Invert depending upon varying depth of soil.
C/D Stresses on Crown(kN/m2) Stresses on Invert(kN/m2)
0.5 47.7471 -214.559
1 -972.177 -93.4189
1.5 628.353 339.588
2 -34.9389 857.032
Stresses on the crown showed significant variation for various soil depths. Whereas for invert it
was not.
MA X IMU M S T R E S S E S
1500
1000
500
Stresses (kn/m2)
0
C/D 0.5 1 1.5 2
-500
-1000
-1500
C/D ratio
Fig 4.8. Maximum Stresses with change in Soil depth
22
Case 9: Effect of Water Depth on Displacements on Crown and Invert.
Table 4.9 Maximum Displacements on Crown and Invert depending upon varying depth of Water
Water depth(m) Displacement of Crown(mm) Displacement of Invert(mm)
-5 -4.1543 0.2462
-10 -4.1543 0.2462
5 -4.1543 0.2462
10 -4.1543 0.2462
With change in water depth, there is no significant variation of displacements. But the Crown has
shown remarkable displacement.
Maximum displacement
0.5
0
-15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15
-0.5
-1
Displacement
-1.5
-2
-2.5
-3
-3.5
-4
-4.5
Water depth
Displacement of Crown(mm) Displacement of Invert(mm)
Fig 4.9. Maximum Displacements with change in Water Depth
23
Case 10: Effect of Water Depth on Stresses on Crown and Invert.
Table 4.10 Maximum Stresses on Crown and Invert depending upon varying depth of Water
Water Depth(m) Stresses on Crown(kN/m2) Stresses on Invert(kN/m2)
-10 250.662 850.624
-5 250.662 850.624
5 -1335.09 -529.646
10 850.624 787.659
Maximum stress has been observed at 5m depth of water.
E ffect of w ater d ep th on stresses

1000
500
Stresses(kn/m2)
0
-15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15
-500
-1000
-1500
Water depth(m)
Stresses on Crown(kN/m2) Stresses on Invert(kN/m2)
Fig 4.10. Effect of water depth on stresses
24
Case 11: Effect of Lining Thickness on Displacements of the Crown and Invert of 6.1
Diameter Tunnel.
Table 4.11 Maximum Displacements on Crown and Invert depending upon varying thickness of
lining.
Lining Displacements of Crown Displacements of Invert
thickness
200 -1.18 0.1
300 -0.24 0.0724
400 -0.32 0.101
450 -0.0722 0.0759
For 300mm lining thickness, vertical displacements of the crown and the invert were observed to
be minimum. Invert displacements did not show significant variation with changing thickness of
preliminary lining.
E ffect of L in in g T h ick n ess on D isp lacemen ts
0.2
0
150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
-0.2
Displacement
-0.4
-0.6
-0.8
-1
-1.2
-1.4
Lining thickness (mm)

Displacements of Crown Displacements of Invert
Fig 4.11. Effect of Lining Thickness on Displacements of 6.1m diameter Tunnel
25
Case 12: Effect of Lining Thickness on Stresses of the Crown and Invert of 6.1 Diameter Tunnel
Table 4.12 Maximum Stresses on Crown and Invert depending upon varying thickness of lining.
Lining thickness(mm) Stresses on Stresses on

Crown(kN/m2) Invert(kN/m2)
200 -85.0361 834.18
300 -20.5596 4.065901
400 -320.213 371.973
450 -255.31 184.87
Maximum Stress on Crown and Invert for 6.1m diameter tunnel were observed when lining
thickness was kept at 300 mm.
E ffect o f lin in g th ick n ess o n stresses

1000
800
600
Stresses kn/m2)
400
200
0
150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
-200
-400
Lining thickness (mm)
Stresses on Crown(kN/m2) Stresses on Invert(kN/m2)
Fig 4.12:- Effect of Lining Thickness on Stresses of 6.1m Diameter Tunnel
26
FOR TWIN TUNNEL

For its stability, the effect of tunnel size, distance between twin-tunnels is investigated with the help of FEM
modelling. Total deformation at crown level, invert level, inner wall level is calculated and surface level
settlement also calculated.
4.13. Displacement
The displacement is closely connected to tunnel's stability as well as long-term viability. The least movement of
the components ensures the structure's great stability. At a key time, the distant and close displacements were
measured and recorded. The displacement and deformation in the distant field are affected by the tunnel
diameter. The influence region of a small diameter tunnel is confined and less disrupting, but a big diameter
tunnel propagates its impact all the way to the ground surface. The overall displacement at the twin tunnel's
crown level, invert level and inner wall level was measured. For tunnels with diameters of 6m.The highest
displacements at crown level, invert level and inner wall level at S=1D case were 3.13mm, 2.65mm, and
2.456mm respectively, Total displacement decreases with increasing spacing and reaches an uniform at spacing
is equal to 1 times tunnel diameter.
C R OWN L E V E L
T1 T2
6
5
Displacement (mm)
0
S/D 0. 5 0. 75 1 1. 5 2 2. 5 3 3. 5 4
R a ti o
s/d ratio
FIG.4.13.1:- Crown level displacement
27
IN N E R WA L L
T1 T2
4.5
4
3.5
3
Displacement
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
S/D 0. 5 0. 75 1 1. 5 2 2. 5 3 3. 5 4
R a ti o
S/d ratio
FIG.4.13.2:- Inner wall displacement
IN VE RT L E VE L
6 T1 T2
4
Displacement
0
S/D 0. 5 0. 75 1 1. 5 2 2. 5 3 3. 5 4
R a ti o
S/d ratio
FIG. 4.13.3:- Invert wall displacement
4.14. GROUND SURFACE SETTLEMENT:- FIG.4.14 shows the ground surface settlement due to twin tunnel
28
excavation, now here observed that the maxmium settlement occurs at ground surface was 6.832 mm and for
the twin tunnel specing is equal to 1 times of d the settlement occurs was 3.245mm which is in permissible
limit.
FIG.4.14 :- GROUND SURFACE SETTLEMENT
4.15 Stress
The von misses pressure was determined for each of the fifteen cases. It is characterized as
σv =
√
( σ 1−σ 2 ) 2+ ( σ 2−σ 3 ) 2+ ( σ 3−σ 1 ) 2
2
It is observed that there isn't a lot of impact on dividing tunnel aspect on pressure. The most intense pressure in
all cases was 13.05 MP. The induced pressure region decreases with increasing twin passage dispersion, while
it increases with increasing tunnel breadth. The essential point to note was that at specing is equal to 1 times of
D, the actuated pressure zones became even with the passage hub, similar to the relocation.
CHAPTER 5
29
Case Study: Pune Metro Underground (Civil Court to Swargate)

5. Introduction to Pune Metro
Pune Metro is a metro rail based rapid transit system under construction to serve the city of
Pune, India. Maharashtra Rail Corporation Limited (Maha-Metro) is a 50:50 jointly owned
company of Government of India and Government of Maharashtra. Pune Metro is a
combination of both underground stations and elevated stations.
The system comprises 3 lines with a total length of 54.58 km. The 16.59 km (Line 1), PCMC Bhavan
– Swargate will be elevated between PCMC Bhavan to Range Hills, from where it will run
underground. The 14.66 km (Line 2), Vanaz – Ramwadi will be elevated. The 23.33 km (Line 3),
Hinjewadi - Civil Court (via Balewadi), elevated. All the three lines will align and intersect at the
Civil Court Interchange Station.
Table 5.1 Pune Metro lines
Line Terminals Length (km) Total no. of
Stations
Line 1 PCMC Bhavan Swargate 16.59 14
Line 2 Vanaz Ramwadi 16.66 16
Line 3 Hinjewadi Civil Court 23.33 23
Fig 5.1 Pune Metro Route Map
30
5.1 Need For Metro
Pune is a cultural capital of Maharashtra so it has witnessed enormous industrial growth since
2000. Rapid urbanization in the recent past has put the city's travel infrastructure to stress. With an
increase in small scale, medium scale as well as heavy industries, the traffic in the city is rising at
alarming rates. The roads in the city, while being narrow, cater to various kinds of vehicles
simultaneously. Being a densely populated area, Pune traffic needs cannot be met by a road-based
system and additional flyovers. So to fulfill the need Pune Metro will help to tackle all the issues,
provide comfortable and convenient commute within cities by significantly reducing travel time
Advantages of Pune Metro

• Reduce Traffic Congestion.
• Will reduce air pollution with no. of vehicles moving.
• Will reduce road accidents with no. of vehicles moving.
• Will reduce the travel time.
• It will be much more cost efficient with respect to running private vehicles.
• Very convenient as the mode is highly comfortable, reliable and timely.
31
5.2 Tunnel Boring Machine (TBM)
Tunnel boring Machine (TBM) is known as “MOLE”. It is used to excavate tunnels with a
circular cross section It can bore through anything from hard rock to sand. Different types of
TBMs are used for different Geo technology. Used as an alternative to drilling and blasting
(D&B) methods and conventional ‘hand mining’ in soil. Limits the disturbance to the
surrounding ground and produces a smooth tunnel wall. Suitable to use in heavily urbanized
areas. TBMs are also a complete single unit moving factory. Only little fishing work has to be
done after using TBMs as this single unit can do
1. Drilling System
2. Concrete Spraying
3. Segmental Lining
4. Rock Supporting
5. Pipe Jacking
6. Conveyance Of Excavated Material
Each TBM used in Pune metro is 6.1 meters in width (Diameter) and 120 meters in length.
Fig 5.3 Tunnel Boring Machine
32
MACHINE TECHNOLOGY
For tunnelling projects different kind of TBMs are used. The Type of TBM varies with ground
condition.
• Soft ground type
- EPB technology
- Slurry shield
- Mix shield
• Hard ground type
- Single shield TBM

- Double shield TBM
Two Types of TBMs:
1. Single Shield TBM
2. Double Shield TBM
Single Shield TBM

Single Shield TBM have no shield as that is used in soft ground, Excavation is done by cutter
rolls transferred through openings in the cutter head to a belt conveyor, and then to muck cars or
conveyor belts. There is no exchange chamber as chips are solid and not as slurry. More
smoother tunnel walls can be created using single shield TBM.
Fig 5.4 Single Shield TBM
33
Double Shield TBM

This type of TBM machine are used for drilling Hard Rock where geological faults zones
occur. The main feature of Hard shield TBM is an extendable front shield in the front part of
the machine, which allow the cutter head to be extended. These are the most technically tunnel
boring machines that is in use.
Fig 5.5 Double Shield TBM
Cutter Head
Cutter heads is the part of the TBM which faces

the ground to be tunnel.
•It will revolve in speed of 1 to10 rpm

•Cutting rolls and cutting blades are mounted
here.
•Cutter head can revolve 360 degree
•They are also provided with openings called
muck buckets for extracting excavated materials
(chips) to the conveyor.
Fig 5.6 Cutter Head
34
Gripper
• Grippers are also called supporting arms of TBMs.
•All TBMs have at least a pair of grippers.
•Grippers provide a radial thrust to the tunnel walls with the help of hydraulic press.
•Grippers are used only when the cutter head moves forward against the tunnel face.
Fig 5.7 Gripper

Conveyors
• The chips are carried out off the tunnel from the tunnel face via many methods,
-Conveyor belts
-Muck cars
-Hydraulic transportation (slurry circuit)
Fig 5.8 Conveyers
35
Concrete Sprayer
•In steel arc segmenting, concrete readymade blocks are placed in-between each.
•While in meshing, concrete is sprayed at high pressure by concrete sprayers.
•The concrete sprayer is operated automatically, so that it provide even finishing everywhere
•Concrete sprayers are fitted behind the gripper section.
•Concrete blocks are placed manually with the help of machineries only after the tunneling
process is finished.
Fig 5.9 Field visit to Civil Court
36
5.3 Precast Segments (Rings)
Segments are precast concrete structures that provide lining or support for an underground
tunnel from various internal and external factors; these segments are combined together and
joined to form one complete circular Ring. These consist of 5 segments and 1 key segment that
holds the ring.
A Tunnel Boring machine is used for boring beneath the ground sequentially, while
simultaneously installing the precast segments and forming a permanent lining of the tunnel. In
addition to finishing the internal wall of the tunnel, the precast segments also serve the
following primary purposes:
• Ensuring that the tunnel will be resilient enough when faced with internal/external
pressure
• Allowing the TBM to move forward as the machine leans upon the last ring it
installed to progress inside the tunnel
In Pune Metro, 6 segments are used to form the ring, 3 ordinary segments (0 1,02,03), 2
tampered segments (T1,T2) and one key segment (K).
Fig 5.10 Precast Segments
Tunnel ring dimensions

Type of ring – Universal Segment
The inner diameter of the ring – 5800 mm
The outer diameter of the ring – 6350 mm
Length of the ring – 1400 mm
The thickness of the ring – 275 mm
37
Fig 5.11 Lining
38
5.4 Methodology
Geotechnical data for modelling was referred from an authentic source for highly weathered
Basalt which is found in Pune as given below.
Sr no. Design Parameter Rock (Basalt)
1 Modulus of Elasticity (E) (Mpa) 1.2 e^6

2 Poisson's Ratio 0.3
3 Unit Weight (kN/m3) 20
4 Cohesion (Mpa) 14
5 Friction Angle ( ˚ ) 64
6 Earth Pressure Coefficient at rest (K0) 1
Model was prepared for single bore tunnel keeping continuum at 3.5 D and cover depth as 2D
i.e 14m where external diameter D= 6.6m.Further the lining thickness was kept at 300mm
with grade of concrete as M40. Displacements and stresses at the crown and the invert were
observed at the validity of result was checked with the existing data of Pune Metro Tunnel.
5.5 Observations
1. The crown upheaved by 2.61mm while invert settled by 1.53mm.

2. Conclusively the tunnel face was stable for a lining thickness of 300mm.
3. While in Pune Metro lining thickness was taken as 275mm this research showed the
optimum lining as 300mm.
39
CHAPTER 6
CONCLUSION
The tunnel construction work for infrastructure development in metropolitan cities provides a
feasible and cost-effective solution. Recent advancement in tunneling using Tunnel Boring
Machine (TBM) has proved to be more beneficial in working under complex and challenging
geological conditions. As the construction of underground structures are prone to effective
with heterogeneous ground conditions and hydrological conditions, geological strata under
beneath need proper investigation in the pre-planning phase of tunnel construction.
For the face stability analysis of 6.1m diameter tunnel in limestone and sandstone modeling
was performed. An extreme value of displacement of the invert in 6.1m diameter tunnel in
limestone for cover depth of 1.5D was seen to be approximately 174 mm (Table 4.4) whereas
the extreme value of compressive stress at the crown of 6.1m diameter tunnel in sandstone
for cover depth of 1.5D was observed to be nearly 34,000 kN/m 2 (Table 4.3).It was
concluded that both 6.1m was stable at 2D as cover depth. Hence for further analysis, 2D was
kept as a constant cover depth.
For the case of heterogeneous strata the displacement of the crown was seen to be
insignificant while invert displacements varied significantly when soil depth was varied.
Maximum displacement was seen at soil depth of 0.5D.
Further the effect of water level (above the tunnel hole) on displacements of crown and invert
was found to be negligible.
When lining thickness was varied the optimum lining thickness for 6.1m diameter tunnel was
found to be 300mm.
Taking into account all the cases, the maximum values of vertical displacements and stresses
with respect to the C/D ratio the graphs were plotted. The interpretation of these graphs
ultimately concluded that the displacement of the crown and invert change with the change in
site geology and size of the tunnel. The problem statement mentioned above can be tackled
with the help of the software Midas Gtx Nx for various cases. The method adopted here can
be extended to a wide range of rock strata. The vertical surface settlements at case S=1D
during the TBM operations are found to be 3.245 from the analyses (i.e. negligible). The
40
highest displacements at crown level, invert level and inner wall level at S=1D case were
3.13mm, 2.65mm, and 2.456mm. Total displacement decreases with increasing spacing and
all the cases the maximum displacement is at S = 1D and other than S=1D case the deflection
pattern is not uniform therefore the most appropriate case is S=1D
REFERENCES
[1] Anagnostou G, and Kovari K, “Face stability conditions with earth-pressure-balanced

shields.” Tunnel Underground Space Technology, 11(2), 165–173,1996.
[2] W.Q. Ding, Z.Q. Yue, L.G. Tham, H.H. Zhu, C.F. Lee, T. Hashimoto, “Analysis of shield
tunnel”, International Journal for Numerical and Analytical Methods in Geomechanics, 28,
57– 91,2004.
[3] V. Guglielmetti, P. Grasso, A. Mahtab, S. Xu, eds., Mechanized tunnelling in urban areas:
design methodology and construction control, Taylor & Francis, 2007.
[4] Mollon G., Dias D., and Soubra, “Probabilistic analysis and design of circular tunnels
against face stability”. Int. J. Geomech.,96, 237–249, 2009.
[5] Peng Zeng1, Salvador Senent2, and Rafael Jimenez3, “Reliability Analysis of Circular
Tunnel Face Stability Obeying Hoek-Brown Failure Criterion Considering Different
Distribution Types and Correlation Structures.”, (ASCE), 10.1061/(ASCE)CP.1943-
5487.0000464 ,2014.
[6] Peng Zeng,” Reliability Analysis of Circular Tunnel Face Stability Obeying Hoek-Brown
Failure Criterion Considering Different Distribution Types and Correlation Structure”,
ASCE., June 2014.
[7] Tiago Gerheim Souza, “TBM Pressure Models- Observations, Theory, and Practice”,
Geotechnical Synergy in Buenos Aires,2015.
[8] Daniel Dias, “Three-Dimensional Face Stability Analysis of Circular Tunnels by

Numerical Simulation”, ASCE,2018.
[9] Shilpa Kulkarni1 and M.S Ranadive2, “Finite Element Analysis for Parametric Study of
Mega Tunnels”, International Conference on Geotechnical Challenges in Mining,
Tunnelling, and Underground Structures, 20-21, 2021.
41
[10] Shilpa Kulkarni1 and M.S Ranadive2, “Investigation for Influence of Pressure on Face
Stability of Mega Tunnels”, International Conference on Geotechnical Challenges in Mining,
Tunnelling, and Underground Structures, 20-21, 2021.
[11] Carranza-Torres, C., & Fairhurst, C. (2000). Application of the convergence-confinement
method of tunnel design to rock masses that satisfy the Hoek-Brown failure criterion.
Tunnelling and underground space technology, 15(2), 187-213.
[12] Ansari, A., Zahoor, F., Rao, K.S., Jain, A.K.: Seismic hazard assessment studies based on
deterministic and probabilistic approaches for the Jammu region, NW Himalayas. Arabian
Journal of Geosciences 15(11), 1-26 (2022c) https://doi.org/10.1007/s12517-022-10330-z
[13] Carranza-Torres, C. (2004). Elasto-plastic solution of tunnel problems using the
generalized form of the Hoek-Brown failure criterion. International Journal of Rock
Mechanics and Mining Sciences, 41(SUPPL. 1), 629-639.
[14] Fattah, M. Y., Shlash, K. T., & Salim, N. M. (2011). Settlement trough due to tunneling in
cohesive ground. Indian Geotechnical Journal, 41(2), 64-75.
[15] Hesami, S., Ahmadi, S., Ghalesari, A. T., & Hasanzadeh, A. (2013). Ground surface
settlement prediction in urban areas due to tunnel excavation by the NATM. Electr. J.
Geotech. Eng, 18, 1961-1972.
42

Abhishek Thesis m.tech

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Abhishek Thesis m.tech

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Abhishek Thesis m.tech

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

College of Engineering, Pune Department of Civil

A PROJECT DISSERTATION REPORT

Submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirement of

Under the Guidance of

Department of Civil Engineering

Department of Civil Engineering,

Dr.S.M.NAWGHARE Dr. B. M. DAWARI

Examination Approval Sheet

“Parametric Study for Designing Preliminary Lining Thickness Of single tunnel

Is approved for the degree of M-Tech Civil (Geotechnical Engineering)

Shivajinagar, Pune - 411005

Examiners Name Signature

1. External Examiner ………………………………………… ………………….

2. Internal Examiner ………………………………………… ………………….

3. Supervisor (s) ………………………………………… …………………..

AKSHAY RAMESHRAO MEHARE

(MIS No. 122021018)

1.2 Aim and Objectives

1. To study various parameters related to tunnel excavation.

METHODOLOGY AND ANALYSIS

3.1 Data Collection

Table 3.1 Pressure parameters

Sr no. Type of pressure Pressure (kN/m2)

1. Drilling/Horizontal/Face Pressure 200

2. Jack thrust -4500

3. Pressure due to contraction over the body of the shield 50

4. Pressure due to gap between shield TBM and 1000

Table 3.2 Geotechnical parameters

Sr.no Design Rock Rock RCC Steel

Modulus of 30 e^6 19.9 e^6 2.1e^7 2.5e^8 1e^7

Table 3.3 Geotechnical parameters for Highly Weathered Basalt

Sr Design parameter Rock (Basalt)

2 Poisson's ratio 0.3

3 Unit weight (kN/m3) 20

5 Friction angle (˚) 64

6 Earth pressure coefficient at rest 1

3.3 Data Analysis

Fig 3.1. Modelling Fig 3.2. 3D Meshing for Analysis

Fig 3.3. Application of Pressure Fig 3.4. Boundary Constraint

3.3.2 Effect of Heterogeneity:

Fig 3.5 Heterogeneity Cases with change in soil depth

3.3.3 Effect of water table :

5m (below ground level)

10m (below ground level)

5/10m (above ground)

Fig 3.6 Various cases of water depth

3.3.4 Effect of preliminary lining thickness on face stability of tunnel.

Fig 3.7. Variation in Lining Thickness

Fig 3.8. Model in Midas-GTX-NX

For Twin Tunnel

3.3.5 Finite Element Method

Fig. 3.9 Geometry of tunnel.

Fig 3.10:- Meshing of twin tunnel

Case 1: Effect of rock property on vertical displacements of the invert.

C/D Displacement of invert in Displacement of invert in sandstone

1.5 1.22 1.2

Maximu m V ertical D isp lacemen ts of In vert

Displacement of invert in limestone (mm) Displacement of invert in sandstone (mm)

Fig 4.1. Maximum Vertical Displacements of Invert